Ruminations on Theology and Personal Development

All this hubbub about the US Supreme Court’s recent decisions touching sodomite unions has people wondering if the United States is caput. Many are also wondering what place of the church of Jesus Christ has to speak to all of this political/judicial/moral carnage.

As a Christian (read: Bible-believer), I am opposed to homosexual activity. I don’t think that a man can “marry” another man. By his Word God defines marriage, and that necessarily precludes same-sex marriages. There is A LOT more to say than that, but at least that needs to be said.

Jefe, would you say that we have a plethora of sexual perversions?

Okay, so if the church of Jesus Christ follows the written Word of God, she will be opposed to homosexual perversions (as well as the PLETHORA of other sexual perversions). What shape should that opposition take?

Like everything else, there is a lot to say about this. In the remainder of this post, I want to highlight a very helpful distinction between the church as institution and the church as organism. The institution of the church is the form the church takes in her government and liturgical ministry. The church of Jesus Christ IS an institution: it has officers (elders and deacons), formal discipline (ending in excommunication), and a formal ministry (the liturgical preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments). However, the church is also rightly conceived of as an organism, a living being. The church is a body fit together with all sorts of people, each of whom are gifted and empowered by the Spirit to live out the commandments of God in their own lives, in communion with one another, and in this world.

The concept of the church as institution is roundly hated by many, including many Christians in our day. We read silliness like, “Christianity is not a religion, it’s a relationship.” The reality, of course, is that it is both of those and more. Regarding our point, the church as organism is dependent upon the church as institution. The regular function of the institutional church empowers and protects the functioning of the church as organism.

Alright, if that distinction makes sense, let’s move on to apply it to the present situation of homosexual “marriage.” How should the church as institution oppose sodomite unions? Should our elders, sessions, bishops, etc. tell us to vote for this or that candidate? Should our pastors stand in the pulpits and say, “Support proposition X” or “Oppose candidate Y”? I do not think so. That’s right. I do NOT think so. I think that the FORMAL ministry of God’s Word should be just that, a ministry of the God’s Word: Law and Gospel. The people who sit under that faithful ministry should go forth, as the organism of the church, and live according to that Word. Thus, the people of God could rightly band together in political/social groups to oppose this issue or support that one. The institution of the church, however, should not engage in that sort of political and social work directly. The institution of the church should continue heralding God’s Word in faithfulness, empowering the organism of the church to apply that Word faithfully in all areas of life.

This distinction, if kept, will allow Christians to live as Christians in EVERY age without making the institutional church the water carrier for any particular age’s political/social agenda. The distinction, if lost, will subject the institutional church to the political/social whims of every age and will rob the organism of the church of her very power house: the ministry of Word and Sacrament.

I’ve been a fan of Raymond Chandler since I first picked up one of his books. (The Big Sleep was my first.)

The Little Sister was a fun read. It was zany and confusing, like everything else from Chandler that I’ve read. The protagonist, Philip Marlowe, is still Marlowe, so there’s wise-crackin’, pipe-smokin’, and hooch-drinkin’ aplenty. The mystery unravels with excitement and amusement. All these elements taken as a whole are pretty much what I want from these stories.

That said, this book certainly was not among my favorites. In fact, I think it’s my least favorite of all Chandler’s books (of course, that I’ve read). Part of the problem may be in the splotchy, hit-and-miss way that I read it. So, maybe it’s better than it seemed to me. Three stars is probably a lower score than is deserved, but there it is.

First off, let me mention that I’m very proud of my friend, Daveed. When I first met him, he was a Muslim and well on his way to being a radical one. Since then, by the power of the resurrected Christ, he’s become a Christian. Praise God! This whole process has given him something of a unique perspective on radical Islam, both domestic and international. You can read all about his experience in My Year Inside Radical Islam. A couple of years ago he also authored a book about how America is not winning the war on terrorism called Bin Laden’s Legacy.

Alright, enough pluggin’ his written work. How about Daveed’s recent work on CNN ? Dig this:

As it comes to the content of that discussion, I admit that I know virtually nothing. Even so, one thing stood out to me that seems quite helpful. Daveed distinguished between “radicalization” and the willingness to engage in violence. These two things are most certainly distinct and need to be understood as such.

Let me illustrate how important this distinction is. I would be (and probably should be) viewed as a radical Christian. Continue Reading »

For all the talk of Led Zeppelin being a “heavy metal” band, I would encourage all to take a listen to their bluesy, gospel sound in the YouTube link below. This whole “video” is just a bunch of unreleased audio cuts of the band either rehearsing (interesting to hear their songs played at half tempo!) or studio recordings from 1968-72. Anyhoo, get a listen to this song.

As I try this out, WordPress doesn’t seem to want to let me link to the exact spot in the YouTube video but is just starting from the beginning. The song mentioned above is the last song and starts at 1:12:50. Sorry.

I think I like Chesterton’s non-fiction more than his fiction. This is (if I recall) the second book of fiction that I’ve read from the great GKC. I have read more of his non-fictional work, and I like it more.

This book, like many mysteries, was a confusing ride. GKC’s word crafting is gorgeous – at points, simply startling. He was a man who knew how to use language. He had a purdy mouth.

The story is full of murder, political intrigue, and interpersonal difficulties. The author worked in some scathing criticism of “Capitalism,” as he saw it in his day. You know, the book was fun, but not super fun. Truth be told, when it comes to someone like GKC, if it ain’t really, really good, it just don’t match up with my expectations. I guess I just expect a great deal from GKC, and this book was, therefore, a slight disappointment.

What is the relationship between spiritual maturity and knowledge of things theological and biblical? This question could be addressed by way of a similar question in a different arena. What’s the relationship between knowledge about how to have good marriage and actually having a good marriage?

If asked in that way, I think a significant portion of the answer is immediately apparent. Can one have a good marriage without knowledge of how to have one? No. That knowledge can be attained from experience (as opposed to reading). What’s more, a person might have that knowledge from experience and not be able to formulate and articulate it. Even so, knowledge about having a good marriage is necessary to having a good marriage, but it is not sufficient to have a good marriage. Clearly, the knowledge must be applied. Continue Reading »